Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant's submission filed on August 6, 2025 was received and has been entered. Claim 1 was amended. Claims 8-9 were cancelled. Claims 18-19 were added. Claims 1-9 and 18-19 are in the application. Claims 10-17 have been withdrawn. Replacement Paragraphs were submitted to correct minor typographical errors. A replacement paragraph was submitted to amend the title.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Drawings
The previous objection to the drawings under 37 CFR 1.83(a) is being maintained. The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “position detection member” in claim 3, “interval measuring member” in claim 4, and “slot die interval adjustment member” in claim 1 ( previously claim 9) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The following reference numerals and the structure they refer to which have been added to Figs. 1A, 1B and 2 :
“111 Slot die interval adjustment member
112 Position detection member
113 Interval measuring member
205 Slot die interval adjustment member”
are objected to as not being part of the original disclosure as filed.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(b) because they are incomplete. 37 CFR 1.83(b) reads as follows:
When the invention consists of an improvement on an old machine the drawing must when possible exhibit, in one or more views, the improved portion itself, disconnected from the old structure, and also in another view, so much only of the old structure as will suffice to show the connection of the invention therewith.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
The previous rejection to claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: “each of the members” is withdrawn based on the amendment to the claims.
Claim 1 recites:
“wherein each of the member that conveys the base material and the coating liquid supply members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the plurality of slot dies are supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus.”
A suggested revision is as follows:
“wherein each of the coating liquid supply members [[is]] are disposed such that the coating liquid is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus.”
Specification
The previous objection to the title of the invention for not being descriptive is withdrawn based on the amendment to the title.
The previous objection to the disclosure for the non-idiomatic phrases “or the like” / “and the like” and other related revisions are withdrawn based on the amendments to the specification.
Claim Interpretation
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “coating liquid supply member” in claim 1, “position detection member” in claim 3, “interval measuring member” in claim 4, “interval control member” in claim 6, and “slot die interval adjustment member” in claim 1 (previously claim 9) .
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The previous rejection of claims 1-2 and 7-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Num. 3,718,117 to Walter Lewicki, Jr. (hereinafter Lewicki) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) is withdrawn based on the amendment to claim 1 and cancellation of claim 8.
Claims 1-2, 7, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20200077766 A to Kim Yoon Kee (hereinafter Kee) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi).
Regarding claim 1, Kee teaches a coating device (12) configured to supply a coating liquid to a surface of a base material (4) and to form a coating film (6) by a meniscus method, the coating device (2) comprising: a member ( conveying table 16) that conveys the base material (10) and a coating bar (11). (See Kee, Abstract, Fig. 1, and col. 2, lines 5-34, 37-67.)
Kee does not explicitly teach a plurality of slot dies in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar.
Han is directed to method for discharging a coating slurry.
Han teaches a plurality of nozzles configured to supply a liquid toward the coating bar. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a plurality of slot dies in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Kee does not explicitly teach a coating liquid supply member that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die.
Yoo teaches a coating liquid supply member (340) that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die (100a-c, 200a-c). (See Yoo, Abstract, paragraphs 14-15, 29-32, and Figs. 1-5.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a coating liquid supply member that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die; because Yoo teaches this is effective way to supply resin to a coating device. (See Yoo, Abstract, paragraphs 14-15, 29-32 and Figs. 1-5.)
Kee does not explicitly teach wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus.
Tonazzi teaches a plurality of nozzles configured to supply a liquid toward the coating bar (25). (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
Tonazzi teach wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar (25) and the base material (29) via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus (23). (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus; because Tonazzi teaches this is effective way to supply resin to a substrate as a continuous sheet. (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
Additionally, regarding claim 1, Kee does not explicitly teach a slot die interval adjustment member that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other.
Han teaches a slot die interval adjustment member (132, 133, 134, 135) that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 31, 35, 37, 39-40, 43, 45, 47-59, 62, and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Regarding claim 2, Kee teaches a cross-sectional shape of the coating bar in a plane perpendicular to a longitudinal direction is constant. (See Kee, Abstract, Fig. 1, and col. 2, lines 5-34, 37-67.)
Regarding claim 7, Kee does not explicitly teach the number of the coating liquid supply members is equal to or smaller than the number of the slot dies.
Tonazzi teaches the number of the coating liquid supply members (source in paragraph 105 or common reservoir in paragraph 111) is equal to or smaller than the number of the slot dies (different dispensing portions 63). (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 104-108, 111, 113, Figs. 8-9.) Examiner is considering different dispensing portions to equivalent to separate slot dies.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach the number of the coating liquid supply members is equal to or smaller than the number of the slot dies, because Tonazzi teaches this structure would enable the preferred technique of providing the coating fluid to be extruded onto the substrate in a vertical mode. (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 104-108, 113, Figs. 8-9.)
Regarding claim 18, Kee does not explicitly teach the slot die interval adjustment member is a spacer provided between the slot dies.
Han teaches the slot die interval adjustment member is a spacer provided between the slot dies. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach the slot die interval adjustment member is a spacer provided between the slot dies, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Regarding claim 19, Kee does not explicitly teach the individual slot die can be attached and detached.
Han teaches the individual slot die can be attached and detached. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach the individual slot die can be attached and detached, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
The previous rejection of claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Num. 3,718,117 to Walter Lewicki, Jr. (hereinafter Lewicki) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) as applied to claim 3 in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20100295896 A1 to Albertalli et al (hereinafter Albertalli) is withdrawn based on the amendment to claim 1.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20200077766 A to Kim Yoon Kee (hereinafter Kee) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) as applied to claim 3 in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20100295896 A1 to Albertalli et al (hereinafter Albertalli).
Regarding claim 3, Kee does not explicitly teach further comprising a position detection member that detects that a longitudinal direction of the coating bar.
Albertalli is directed to method for capturing image data of the coating device and using a computer determine a difference between a desired position of the opening of the coating device and an actual position of the opening of the coating device.
Albertalli teaches further comprising a position detection member (916) that detects that a longitudinal direction of the coating bar (substrate orientation). (See Albertalli, Abstract, and paragraphs 113-116.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a position detection member that detects that a longitudinal direction of the coating bar; because Albertalli teaches this is effective way to eliminate possible sources of human error or allow for adjustments “on the fly”. (See Albertalli, Abstract, and paragraphs 62, 85, 113-116.)
Regarding claim 3, Lewicki does not explicitly teach further comprising a position detection member that detects that a coating liquid discharge port of the slot die are parallel to each other.
Albertalli teaches comprising a position detection member that detects that a coating liquid discharge port of the slot die are parallel (orientation adjusted) to each other (rotational orientation of substrate). (See Albertalli, Abstract, and paragraphs 113-116.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a position detection member that detects that a coating liquid discharge port of the slot die are parallel to each other; because Albertalli teaches this is effective way to eliminate possible sources of human error or allow for adjustments “on the fly”. (See Albertalli, Abstract, and paragraphs 62, 85, 113-116.)
The previous rejection of claims 4-5 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Num. 3,718,117 to Walter Lewicki, Jr. (hereinafter Lewicki) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20150062223 A1 to Takeuchi et al (hereinafter Takeuchi) is withdrawn based on the amendments to claims 4-5.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20200077766 A to Kim Yoon Kee (hereinafter Kee) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20150062223 A1 to Takeuchi et al (hereinafter Takeuchi).
Regarding claim 4, Kee does not explicitly teach an interval measuring member that measures an interval between the coating bar and the slot die.
Takeuchi is directed to a droplet discharge detector.
Takeuchi teaches an interval measuring member that measures an interval between the coating bar and the slot die. (See Takeuchi, Abstract, paragraphs 10-11, 19-23, 65, 75, 78-93, 97-100, 106, 159, Figs. 1-11.) Examiner is considering the resistor in the droplet discharge detector to be opposite the plurality of nozzles and equivalent to a location of the coating bar.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval measuring member that measures an interval between the coating bar and the slot die, because Takeuchi teaches this would enable an operator to determine if discharge of the nozzles has taken place. (See Takeuchi, Abstract, paragraphs 10-11, 19-23, 65, 75, 78-93, 97-100, 106, 159, Figs. 1-11.)
Regarding claim 5, Kee does not explicitly teach the interval measuring member measures the interval by measuring electric resistance between the coating bar and the slot die.
Takeuchi teaches the interval measuring member measures the interval by measuring electric resistance between the coating bar and the slot die. (See Takeuchi, Abstract, paragraphs 10-11, 19-23, 65, 75, 78-93, 97-100, 106, 159, Figs. 1-11.) Examiner is considering the resistor in the droplet discharge detector to be opposite the plurality of nozzles and equivalent to a location of the coating bar.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach the the interval measuring member measures the interval by measuring electric resistance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Takeuchi teaches this would enable an operator to determine if discharge of the nozzles has taken place. (See Takeuchi, Abstract, paragraphs 10-11, 19-23, 65, 75, 78-93, 97-100, 106, 159, Figs. 1-11.)
The previous rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Num. 3,718,117 to Walter Lewicki, Jr. (hereinafter Lewicki) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20150086799 A1 to Kasyanova et al (hereinafter Kasyanova) is withdrawn based on the amendment to claim 1.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20200077766 A to Kim Yoon Kee (hereinafter Kee) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20150086799 A1 to Kasyanova et al (hereinafter Kasyanova).
Regarding claim 6, Kee does not explicitly teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die.
Kasyanaova is directed to use of roll-to-roll coating, Mayer rod coating of a polymer solution onto a substrate. (See Kasyanova, Abstract, paragraphs 5, 29, 31, 93, 104-105, and Figs. 4-5.)
Kasyanaova teaches an interval control member (die positioner) that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die. (See Kasyanova, Abstract, paragraphs 5, 29, 31, 93, 104-105, and Figs. 4-5.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Kasyanaova teaches this would enable the die to be positioned at the optimum angle. (See Kasyanova, Abstract, paragraphs 5, 29, 31, 93, 104-105, and Figs. 4-5.)
The previous rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Num. 3,718,117 to Walter Lewicki, Jr. (hereinafter Lewicki) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of JP H1133460 A to Hideo Yabuhara et al (hereinafter Yabuhara) is withdrawn based on the cancellation of claim 9.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Pub. 20090324842 to Tanaka et al (hereinafter Tanaka) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) .
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka teaches a coating device (21) configured to supply a coating liquid to a surface of a base material (S) and to form a coating film (CL1) by a meniscus method, the coating device (2) comprising: a member ( conveying roll 11) that conveys the base material (S) and a coating bar (31). (See Tanaka, Abstract, Figs. 1, 7, and 12 and paragraph 11-12, 39, 127, 178-194, and 259.)
Tanaka teaches a plurality of slot dies (21a, 21a) in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar (31); and a coating liquid supply member (22) that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die. (See Tanaka, Abstract, Figs. 1, 7, and 12 and paragraph 11-12, 39, 127, 178-194, and 259.)
Tanaka teaches wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar (31)and the base material (S) via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus (CP1). (See Tanaka, Abstract, Figs. 1, 7, and 12 and paragraph 11-12, 39, 127, 178-194, and 259.)
Tanaka teach a plurality of slot dies (21a) in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar (31). (See Tanaka, Abstract, Figs. 1, 7, and 12 and paragraph 11-12, 39, 127, and 181-184.)
Additionally, regarding claim 1, Tanaka does not explicitly teach a slot die interval adjustment member that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other.
Han teaches a slot die interval adjustment member (132, 133, 134, 135) that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 31, 35, 37, 39-40, 43, 45, 47-59, 62, and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka teaches a cross-sectional shape of the coating bar in a plane perpendicular to a longitudinal direction is constant. (See Tanaka, Abstract, Figs. 1, 7, and 12 and paragraph 11-12, 39, 127, 178-194, and 259.)
Regarding claim 18, Tanaka does not explicitly teach the slot die interval adjustment member is a spacer provided between the slot dies.
Han teaches the slot die interval adjustment member is a spacer provided between the slot dies. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach the slot die interval adjustment member is a spacer provided between the slot dies, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Regarding claim 19, Tanaka does not explicitly teach the individual slot die can be attached and detached.
Han teaches the individual slot die can be attached and detached. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach the individual slot die can be attached and detached, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Pub. 20090324842 to Tanaka et al (hereinafter Tanaka) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20100295896 A1 to Albertalli et al (hereinafter Albertalli).
Regarding claim 3, Kee does not explicitly teach further comprising a position detection member that detects that a longitudinal direction of the coating bar.
Albertalli is directed to method for capturing image data of the coating device and using a computer determine a difference between a desired position of the opening of the coating device and an actual position of the opening of the coating device.
Albertalli teaches further comprising a position detection member (916) that detects that a longitudinal direction of the coating bar (substrate orientation). (See Albertalli, Abstract, and paragraphs 113-116.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a position detection member that detects that a longitudinal direction of the coating bar; because Albertalli teaches this is effective way to eliminate possible sources of human error or allow for adjustments “on the fly”. (See Albertalli, Abstract, and paragraphs 62, 85, 113-116.)
Regarding claim 3, Lewicki does not explicitly teach further comprising a position detection member that detects that a coating liquid discharge port of the slot die are parallel to each other.
Albertalli teaches comprising a position detection member that detects that a coating liquid discharge port of the slot die are parallel (orientation adjusted) to each other (rotational orientation of substrate). (See Albertalli, Abstract, and paragraphs 113-116.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a position detection member that detects that a coating liquid discharge port of the slot die are parallel to each other; because Albertalli teaches this is effective way to eliminate possible sources of human error or allow for adjustments “on the fly”. (See Albertalli, Abstract, and paragraphs 62, 85, 113-116.)
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Pub. 20090324842 to Tanaka et al (hereinafter Tanaka) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20150062223 A1 to Takeuchi et al (hereinafter Takeuchi).
Regarding claim 4, Tanaka does not explicitly teach an interval measuring member that measures an interval between the coating bar and the slot die.
Takeuchi is directed to a droplet discharge detector.
Takeuchi teaches an interval measuring member that measures an interval between the coating bar and the slot die. (See Takeuchi, Abstract, paragraphs 10-11, 19-23, 65, 75, 78-93, 97-100, 106, 159, Figs. 1-11.) Examiner is considering the resistor in the droplet discharge detector to be opposite the plurality of nozzles and equivalent to a location of the coating bar.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval measuring member that measures an interval between the coating bar and the slot die, because Takeuchi teaches this would enable an operator to determine if discharge of the nozzles has taken place. (See Takeuchi, Abstract, paragraphs 10-11, 19-23, 65, 75, 78-93, 97-100, 106, 159, Figs. 1-11.)
Regarding claim 5, Tanaka does not explicitly teach the interval measuring member measures the interval by measuring electric resistance between the coating bar and the slot die.
Takeuchi teaches the interval measuring member measures the interval by measuring electric resistance between the coating bar and the slot die. (See Takeuchi, Abstract, paragraphs 10-11, 19-23, 65, 75, 78-93, 97-100, 106, 159, Figs. 1-11.) Examiner is considering the resistor in the droplet discharge detector to be opposite the plurality of nozzles and equivalent to a location of the coating bar.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach the the interval measuring member measures the interval by measuring electric resistance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Takeuchi teaches this would enable an operator to determine if discharge of the nozzles has taken place. (See Takeuchi, Abstract, paragraphs 10-11, 19-23, 65, 75, 78-93, 97-100, 106, 159, Figs. 1-11.)
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Pub. 20090324842 to Tanaka et al (hereinafter Tanaka) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20150086799 A1 to Kasyanova et al (hereinafter Kasyanova).
Regarding claim 6, Tanaka does not explicitly teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die.
Kasyanaova is directed to use of roll-to-roll coating, Mayer rod coating of a polymer solution onto a substrate. (See Kasyanova, Abstract, paragraphs 5, 29, 31, 93, 104-105, and Figs. 4-5.)
Kasyanaova teaches an interval control member (die positioner) that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die. (See Kasyanova, Abstract, paragraphs 5, 29, 31, 93, 104-105, and Figs. 4-5.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Kasyanaova teaches this would enable the die to be positioned at the optimum angle. (See Kasyanova, Abstract, paragraphs 5, 29, 31, 93, 104-105, and Figs. 4-5.)
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Pub. 20090324842 to Tanaka et al (hereinafter Tanaka) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) .
Regarding claim 7, Tanaka does not explicitly teach the number of the coating liquid supply members is equal to or smaller than the number of the slot dies.
Tonazzi teaches the number of the coating liquid supply members (source in paragraph 105 or common reservoir in paragraph 111) is equal to or smaller than the number of the slot dies (different dispensing portions 63). (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 104-108, 111, 113, Figs. 8-9.) Examiner is considering different dispensing portions to equivalent to separate slot dies.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach the number of the coating liquid supply members is equal to or smaller than the number of the slot dies, because Tonazzi teaches this structure would enable the preferred technique of providing the coating fluid to be extruded onto the substrate in a vertical mode. (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 104-108, 113, Figs. 8-9.)
Double Patenting
The previous rejection of claim 1 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6, respectively, of copending US Pat. Pub. No. 20220379339 A1 to Shida, Naito, and Saita et al (hereinafter Shida) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) is withdrawn based on the amendment to claim 1.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6, respectively, of copending US Pat. Pub. No. 20220379339 A1 to Shida, Naito, and Saita et al (hereinafter Shida) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because regarding claim 6, Shida teaches a coating device (preamble claim 1: a coating apparatus), comprising: a coating bar (claim 1: a coating bar), a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar (claim 6: first nozzle … second nozzle. configured to supply a liquid toward the coating bar) .
Shida does not explicitly teach a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; and a coating liquid supply member that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die.
Yoo teaches a slot die (100a-c, 200a-c) that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the substrate; and a coating liquid supply member (340) that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die (100a-c, 200a-c). (See Yoo, Abstract, paragraphs 14-15, 29-32, and Figs. 1-5.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; and a coating liquid supply member that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die; because Yoo teaches this is effective way to supply resin to a substrate. (See Yoo, Abstract, paragraphs 14-15, 29-32 and Figs. 1-5.)
Shida does not explicitly teach a plurality of slot dies in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar.
Han is directed to method for discharging a coating slurry.
Han teaches a plurality of nozzles configured to supply a liquid toward the coating bar. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a plurality of slot dies in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Additionally, regarding claim 1, Shida does not explicitly teach a slot die interval adjustment member that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other.
Han teaches a slot die interval adjustment member (132, 133, 134, 135) that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 31, 35, 37, 39-40, 43, 45, 47-59, 62, and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Shida does not explicitly teach each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus.
Tonazzi teach wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar (25) and the base material (29) via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus (23). (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus; because Tonazzi teaches this is effective way to supply resin to a substrate as a continuous sheet. (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
The previous rejection of claim 1 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 7, respectively, of copending US Pat. Pub. No. 20220161292 A1 to Naito, Shida, and Nara et al (hereinafter Nara) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) is withdrawn based on the amendment to claim 1.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 7, respectively, of copending US Pat. Pub. No. 20220161292 A1 to Naito, Shida, and Nara et al (hereinafter Nara) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because regarding claim 7, Nara teaches a coating device (preamble claim 1: a coating apparatus), comprising: a coating bar (claim 6: a coating bar), a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar (claim 6: first nozzle … second nozzle. configured to supply a liquid toward the coating bar) .
Nara does not explicitly teach a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; and a coating liquid supply member that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die.
Yoo teaches a slot die (100a-c, 200a-c) that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the substrate; and a coating liquid supply member (340) that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die (100a-c, 200a-c). (See Yoo, Abstract, paragraphs 14-15, 29-32, and Figs. 1-5.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; and a coating liquid supply member that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die; because Yoo teaches this is effective way to supply resin to a substrate. (See Yoo, Abstract, paragraphs 14-15, 29-32 and Figs. 1-5.)
Nara does not explicitly teach a plurality of slot dies in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar.
Han teaches a plurality of nozzles configured to supply a liquid toward the coating bar. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a plurality of slot dies in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Additionally, regarding claim 1, Nara does not explicitly teach a slot die interval adjustment member that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other.
Han teaches a slot die interval adjustment member (132, 133, 134, 135) that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 31, 35, 37, 39-40, 43, 45, 47-59, 62, and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Nara does not explicitly teach each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus.
Tonazzi teach wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar (25) and the base material (29) via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus (23). (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus; because Tonazzi teaches this is effective way to supply resin to a substrate as a continuous sheet. (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
The previous rejection of claim 1 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of US Pat. Pub. No. 20220161292 A1 to Naito, Shida, Nara, and Kokubo et al (hereinafter Kokubo) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi) is withdrawn based on the amendment to claim 1.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of US Pat. Pub. No. 20220161292 A1 to Naito, Shida, Nara, and Kokubo et al (hereinafter Kokubo) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20240050976 A1 to Han et al (hereinafter Han) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20060102036 A1 to Yoo et al (hereinafter Yoo) and US Pat. Pub. No. 20020121239 A1 to Tonazzi et al (hereinafter Tonazzi).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because regarding claim 11, Kokubo teaches a coating device (preamble claim 1: a coating head), comprising: a coating bar (claim 1: a coating bar), a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar (claim 6: first nozzle … second nozzle. configured to supply a liquid toward the coating bar) .
Kokubo does not explicitly teach a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; and a coating liquid supply member that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die.
Yoo teaches a slot die (100a-c, 200a-c) that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the substrate; and a coating liquid supply member (340) that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die (100a-c, 200a-c). (See Yoo, Abstract, paragraphs 14-15, 29-32, and Figs. 1-5.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a slot die that supplies the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; and a coating liquid supply member that supplies the coating liquid to the slot die; because Yoo teaches this is effective way to supply resin to a substrate. (See Yoo, Abstract, paragraphs 14-15, 29-32 and Figs. 1-5.)
Kokubo does not explicitly teach a plurality of slot dies in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar.
Han teaches a plurality of nozzles configured to supply a liquid toward the coating bar. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a plurality of slot dies in parallel with other that supply the coating liquid to a surface of the coating bar; because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Additionally, regarding claim 1, Kokubo does not explicitly teach a slot die interval adjustment member that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other.
Han teaches a slot die interval adjustment member (132, 133, 134, 135) that adjusts an interval between the slot dies adjacent to each other. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 31, 35, 37, 39-40, 43, 45, 47-59, 62, and Figs. 1-4.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to teach an interval control member that controls a distance between the coating bar and the slot die, because Han teaches this is effective way to adjust the coating width of the slurry as needed. (See Han, Abstract, paragraphs 1, 11, 55, and 62 and Figs. 1-4.)
Kokubo does not explicitly teach each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus.
Tonazzi teach wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar (25) and the base material (29) via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus (23). (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include wherein each of the members is disposed such that the coating liquid supplied from the slot die is supplied to a space between the coating bar and the base material via the surface of the coating bar to form a meniscus; because Tonazzi teaches this is effective way to supply resin to a substrate as a continuous sheet. (See Tonazzi, Abstract, paragraphs 13-15, 72, 82-88, 92, 95, and 111-112, Figs. 2-5, 7.)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-7 and 18-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Pat. Pub. No. 20090252878 A1 to Shinohara is directed to a coating bar having a continuous supply of coating liquid from a supply head. (See Shinohara, Abstract.)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARL V KURPLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3477. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 AM-5 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached on (571) 272-1295. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KARL KURPLE/Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717